Kyotaro HORIGUCHI writes:
> At Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:39:18 -0500, Tom Lane wrote in
> <22609.1519936...@sss.pgh.pa.us>
>> ... After some poking
>> around I found that the bug could be exhibited using just btree_gist's
>> gist_inet_ops, since the core inet_ops class indexes the same datatype and
>
At Thu, 01 Mar 2018 15:39:18 -0500, Tom Lane wrote in
<22609.1519936...@sss.pgh.pa.us>
> Kyotaro HORIGUCHI writes:
> > At Wed, 24 Jan 2018 00:13:51 +0300, Sergei Kornilov wrote
> > in <348951516742...@web54j.yandex.ru>
> >> Should we also make backport to older versions? I test on REL_10_STABL
Kyotaro HORIGUCHI writes:
> At Wed, 24 Jan 2018 00:13:51 +0300, Sergei Kornilov wrote in
> <348951516742...@web54j.yandex.ru>
>> Should we also make backport to older versions? I test on REL_10_STABLE -
>> patch builds and works ok, but "make check" fails on new testcase with error:
> CREATE IN
Thank you for looking this.
At Wed, 24 Jan 2018 00:13:51 +0300, Sergei Kornilov wrote in
<348951516742...@web54j.yandex.ru>
> Hello
> I tested this patch and think it can be commited to master. Is there a CF
> record? I can not find one.
Not yet. I'm thinking of creating an entry in the next C
Hi!
> 24 янв. 2018 г., в 2:13, Sergei Kornilov написал(а):
>
> Should we also make backport to older versions? I test on REL_10_STABLE -
> patch builds and works ok, but "make check" fails on new testcase with error:
>> CREATE INDEX ON t USING gist (a test_inet_ops, a inet_ops);
>> + ERROR: mis
Hello
I tested this patch and think it can be commited to master. Is there a CF
record? I can not find one.
Should we also make backport to older versions? I test on REL_10_STABLE - patch
builds and works ok, but "make check" fails on new testcase with error:
> CREATE INDEX ON t USING gist (a t
Hello.
At Fri, 19 Jan 2018 01:16:56 +0300, Alexander Korotkov
wrote in
> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <
> horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> > Index only scan is not usable in the case since the first index
> > column cannot be rechecked but check_index_only makes
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <
horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> At Wed, 17 Jan 2018 22:26:15 +0300, Sergei Kornilov
> wrote in <412861516217...@web38o.yandex.ru>
> > Hello
> > I can reproduce on actual 9.6.6, 10.1 and fresh master build
> > (9c7d06d60680c7f00d931233
Hello.
At Thu, 18 Jan 2018 17:25:05 +0900, Michael Paquier
wrote in <20180118082505.ga84...@paquier.xyz>
> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 12:57:38PM +0500, Andrey Borodin wrote:
> >> Please find the attached patch.
> > I agree with you that current behavior is a bug and your patch seems
> > correct.
>
At Thu, 18 Jan 2018 12:57:38 +0500, Andrey Borodin wrote
in <62c2b9a0-51bc-40ff-9bca-f203784cb...@yandex-team.ru>
> Hello!
> > 18 янв. 2018 г., в 10:48, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
> > написал(а):
> >
> > Gist imposes the ninth strategy to perform index only scan but
> > planner is not considering that
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 12:57:38PM +0500, Andrey Borodin wrote:
>> 18 янв. 2018 г., в 10:48, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
>> написал(а):
>>
>> Gist imposes the ninth strategy to perform index only scan but
>> planner is not considering that
>>
>> Please find the attached patch.
> I agree with you that
Hello!
> 18 янв. 2018 г., в 10:48, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
> написал(а):
>
> Gist imposes the ninth strategy to perform index only scan but
> planner is not considering that
>
> Please find the attached patch.
I agree with you that current behavior is a bug and your patch seems correct.
I'm a bit
Hello,
Gist imposes the ninth strategy to perform index only scan but
planner is not considering that.
At Wed, 17 Jan 2018 22:26:15 +0300, Sergei Kornilov
wrote in <412861516217...@web38o.yandex.ru>
> Hello
> I can reproduce on actual 9.6.6, 10.1 and fresh master build
> (9c7d06d60680c7f00d931
13 matches
Mail list logo
